Has ASEAN become Marginalized within Regional Security Architecture?
South Asian leaders continue to reiterate how “central” ASEAN is to the region’s security architecture. However, in practice, the tendency is to prioritize bilateral agreements, gradually marginalizing the organization. This fragmentation is weakening regional cooperation, accentuating divisions, and compromising stability in the context of growing tensions in the Indo-Pacific. These trends are worrying at a time when Sino-American rivalries are becoming more acute.
The global competition between China and the United States is particularly evident in Southeast Asia in the area of security. In this maritime and continental space located at the confluence of the Indian and Pacific Oceans, their competing strategies shape the regional environment in at least two ways. On the one hand, the actions of Beijing and Washington directly affect the sovereignty and security of coastal states, particularly in the South China Sea, where China is deploying a range of hybrid actions—occupation and reclamation of islets, harassment of fishermen and coast guards from other nations, cyberattacks and information operations—to which Washington responds by increasing freedom of navigation operations and other naval exercises. On the other hand, both China and the United States are investing in deepened security partnerships, which are vectors of their regional influence.
Faced with the effects of Sino-American rivalry, Southeast Asian states are in turn developing defense strategies and policies aimed at protecting themselves and promoting their interests, while at the same time prompting a redefinition of the regional security architecture (RSA). The latter can be broadly divided into three systems: bilateral and minilateral cooperation frameworks serving an operational purpose; partnerships with the United States, perceived by most neighboring countries as guarantors of regional stability and therefore deserving of special attention; and finally, a juxtaposition of multilateral forums organized around the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). These forums are designed as spaces for regional cooperation and socialization, intended to facilitate adherence to a set of norms, enable the emergence of common strategic perceptions and, above all, dilute the influence of extra-regional powers such as China, the United States, India and Japan within a broader group under the leadership of the association. [...]
Juliette Loesch is associate research fellow at Ifri's Center for Asian Studies.
This article is available only in French and has been published in Politique étrangère, Vol. 90, No. 4, 2025.
Available in:
Themes and regions
Share
Author(s)
Juliette LOESCH
Associate Research Fellow, Center for Asian Studies, Ifri
Find out more
Discover all our analyses
The Future of Europe in the Context of Sino-American Competition
This special issue of Politique étrangère focuses on the proceedings of the Conference organized by the French Institute of International Relations (Ifri) for its 40th anniversary, held on April 10th, 2019, in Sorbonne University's Grand Amphithéâtre.
The Waning of Universalism
During the 19th century, Westerners provided ideological justifications for their colonization, namely spreading the Enlightenment across the globe. This project was received favorably until the second half of the 20th century. Over the last 20 years, it has met new hostility. The “universal values” promoted by the West are viewed today as a form of imperialism to be opposed – especially by China, Russia and Turkey.
The Future of the International Monetary and Financial System
Following the collapse of the Bretton Woods system, the international community sought new stability in the financial system and the assurance of sustained growth. The crisis that began in 2007-2008 has revealed weaknesses that affected advanced economies first and foremost. Efforts have since been made to consolidate the international financial architecture, to coordinate macroeconomic policy, and to improve foreign exchange relations, even if this latter objective has proven complex.
International trade disagreements: Beyond Trump
The trade war between the United States and China is not only due to Donald Trump’s impulsiveness. Its roots are in fact profound and follow three structural changes in the multilateral trading system: the reversal of comparative advantages, the now central role of certain developing countries, and the re-balancing of power that makes coordination between states difficult. In this context, the future of world trade has yet to be written.